why didnt i study this in five years of thermodinamics

[raaaid]

check out the wki article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minto_wheel

only reference in 100 years is mother erath magazine

[swiss]

Originally Posted by raaaid

check out the wki article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minto_wheel

only reference in 100 years is mother erath magazine

I see.
It has a wiki article but no one knows about it.
You'll be a billionaire soon, trust me.

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by raaaid

i had a stirling in class too but i was talking of minto wheel

or maybe you had heard about it before?

The purpose of a text book is not to showcase every single example of a concept. That stupid wheel is simply another closed cycle heat engine, and a very bad one at that.

The reason no one knows about it is because it is useless in the real world. There are hundreds of better ways to produce power right now.


--Outlaw.

[raaaid]

well outlaw so you belive i did study thermo, check this out:

http://energy.sdsu.edu/testhome/Test...C/TSatR12.html

the vapur pressure differnce bewteen top and bottom with a gradient of five degrees its 100 kpa

this means the wheel can work with 10 m diametrum on a 5 º gradient

how much work is that for kg of r12?

1*10*10=100 J

whats the internal energy difference for 5 º
around 5 J/kg

U variation=Q-W
5=Q-100

Q=105

eficiency=w/q=100/105=95% eficiency

negelcting a ten percent of mechanical lost it gives the 85% figure matching the claimed author eficiency

if it filtered to the wiki is cause things are changing due to the 2012 effect of next leap of evolution

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by raaaid

well outlaw so you belive i did study thermo, check this out:

http://energy.sdsu.edu/testhome/Test...C/TSatR12.html

the vapur pressure differnce bewteen top and bottom with a gradient of five degrees its 100 kpa

this means the wheel can work with 10 m diametrum on a 5 º gradient

how much work is that for kg of r12?

1*10*10=100 J

whats the internal energy difference for 5 º
around 5 J/kg

U variation=Q-W
5=Q-100

Q=105

eficiency=w/q=100/105=95% eficiency

negelcting a ten percent of mechanical lost it gives the 85% figure matching the claimed author eficiency

if it filtered to the wiki is cause things are changing due to the 2012 effect of next leap of evolution

Lmao where did you study thermodynamics? Chumpsville by any chance lol

[raaaid]

so whats wrong?

well i saw it:

whats the internal energy difference for 5 º
around 2000 J/kg

U variation=Q-W
2000=Q-100

Q=2100

eficiency=w/q=100/2100=4.7% eficiency

eficiency for carnot?

1-cold focus/hot focus=1.3%

[JG52Krupi]

I have studied thermofluids albeit very briefly but I can tell that your figures just come our of thin air.

[JG52Krupi]

If you were to work it out you would require a hell of a lot more equations and all the assumptions you made...

It should look more like this

http://www.borderschess.org/MintoWhe...tionUpdate.pdf

[raaaid]

whats the internal energy difference for 5 º
around 2000 J/kg in the best case

around 5000 j/kg in the worst case


U variation=Q-W
2000=Q-100


Q=2100


eficiency=w/q=100/2100=4.7% eficiency
in the worst case: 100/5100=2%

maximum eficiency for carnot?


1-cold focus/hot focus=1.3%

[JG52Krupi]

It's just not that simple you can't just take random figures out of nowhere and except ppl to believe them, if you really did study thermodynamics then get your notes out and work the efficiency out correctly.